i just got the nec 3500a and wanna install it but i read in another forum that the nec doesnt work well under slave. im using a dell and the cd burner it came with should be in master(i havent opened it up yet) so should i just set my NEC to Master then the Dell cd burner to slave? or just set it up as a slave?

Someone correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t believe it makes any difference. But I would make which ever drive I use the most the master. And just make sure that they both stay set to DMA. Welcome to the Forum.

I would recommend you make the NEC the master, and your cd writer the slave.

Master and slave really only matter when you are running devices on the same IDE at the same time. For example, if you had two NEC writers on the same IDE channel and were burning to them both simultaneously, the master would be favoured and would produce a better burn. Whereas the disc burned in the slave drive would be more prone to skipping/jumping errors during playback.

But since you are only pairing your writer with a cd writer, it shouldn’t really make that much difference. But go with the master setting to be on the safe side.

I have a Dell Dimension 4600, and I just got an NEC 3500 for it a few weeks ago. The other drive in the computer is a Sony (OEM Litey) 48x CD-writer.

I put the NEC at the end of the IDE cable in cable select in the top slot of the computer, and the Sony at the middle position of the IDE cable in cable select. Everything works great. I have found that I use the NEC for pretty much everything including Cd burning. Great drive.

i just got the nec 3500a and wanna install it but i read in another forum that the nec doesnt work well under slave. im using a dell and the cd burner it came with should be in master(i havent opened it up yet) so should i just set my NEC to Master then the Dell cd burner to slave? or just set it up as a slave?

Mine has always been in “Slave” with no trouble at all, as rule of thum, your source of data that feed in to your writer (DVD-ROM) must be in Master and your destination (NEC writer) should be in Slave position for better follow of data and receiving data. But you can do otherwise also.

Mine has always been in “Slave” with no trouble at all, as rule of thum, your source of data that feed in to your writer (DVD-ROM) must be in Master and your destination (NEC writer) should be in Slave position for better follow of data and receiving data. But you can do otherwise also.

Technically, for the best flow of data your source of data should not even be on the same IDE as your destination drive. And your destination drive is always best as Master. Your source drive can be either master or slave.

In theory, my 2nd dvd rom would be best on IDE5 as secondary master. However, at the moment, I lack the necessary IDE cable to do this and besides, things are already conglomerated enough.

But the above setup works better than any other I have tried, and believe me I have tried A LOT of setups. The 2 NEC drives can certainly cope doing simultaneous 12x burns on the fly … Or burn simultaneously 12x from 2 separate hard drives. With Maxtor 120GB supplying primary master NEC, and WD 160GB suppling secondary master NEC. Which breaks my rules, I know, but works well nevertheless. So, I guess I must be doing something right.

…Master and slave really only matter when you are running devices on the same IDE at the same time. For example, if you had two NEC writers on the same IDE channel and were burning to them both simultaneously, the master would be favoured and would produce a better burn. Whereas the disc burned in the slave drive would be more prone to skipping/jumping errors during playback…

This is untrue. There is no performance difference between master and slave. Even if there were, buffer underrun protection would prevent any burning problems caused by delays in data transmission. In fact, master and slave are misleading terms. The master drive is not in control, and the slave drive is not subservient to it.

The drives in question can be configured either as master or slave with no adverse consequences (be sure that the jumpers are set properly). If you want to be able to boot from a given optical drive, I would install that one as master. If an IDE cable has only one drive installed, the standard says it should be installed as master (although it will usually work as a slave). The master drive should always be installed at the end of an 80 wire IDE cable, and the slave on the interior connection. A solitary drive should never be installed to the interior IDE connection.

This is untrue. There is no performance difference between master and slave. Even if there were, buffer underrun protection would prevent any burning problems caused by delays in data transmission.

Trust me, if burning simultaneously, the slave drive suffers. You notice this when you are using crappy media. You can usually get away with it if you are using better quality media.

But if you have crappy media in master and crappy media in slave (master and slave on same IDE) and burn to both drives, at the same time, the slave will produce a lower quality of backup. As with all things computery, it doesn’t matter what the gospel theory is, practical fact will always prove otherwise.

Inertia:

The master drive should always be installed at the end of an 80 wire IDE cable, and the slave on the interior connection.

As for that statement… OLD WIVES TALE.
Master can be on either, if anything I favour it on the interior.

Trust me, if burning simultaneously, the slave drive suffers. You notice this when you are using crappy media. You can usually get away with it if you are using better quality media.

But if you have crappy media in master and crappy media in slave (master and slave on same IDE) and burn to both drives, at the same time, the slave will produce a lower quality of backup. As with all things computery, it doesn’t matter what the gospel theory is, practical fact will always prove otherwise.

Sorry, but I don’t come even close to trusting you. It’s fairly obvious that you are blowing smoke. You would do better to try to learn something rather than bluffing your way with erroneous theories about things you obviously know nothing about.

Inertia:

[i]The master drive should always be installed at the end of an 80 wire IDE cable, and the slave on the interior connection.[/i]

hellbitch:

As for that statement… OLD WIVES TALE.
Master can be on either, if anything I favour it on the interior.

You’re wrong again, hellbitch. If you had read the information in the link I provided, you would have learned something from someone who knows what he is talking about. Your should read the article, but I will provide a brief

…there can be electrical signaling issues if one connects a single drive to only the middle connector on a cable, leaving the end connector unattached. In particular, the use of Ultra DMA is not supported in such a configuration…

The above information pertains to an older 40 wire IDE cable. On the latest 80 wire cables, the connectors are coded for master at the end of the cable and slave in the middle (if present). This configuration is set and required by the ATA/ATAPI-4 Standard .

You are right, I am just blowing smoke but I am also just telling you the difference between theory and practice. All my drives that are set as master are on the first (interior) connector of an 80 wire IDE cable. And all the slaves, on the end connector.

The 2 dvd roms are in UDMA Mode 2.
The 2 dvd writers are in UDMA Mode 2.
Maxtor HDD is in UDMA Mode 6.
Both WD HDD’s are in UDMA Mode 5.

I don’t have any problems.

As for burning, on the fly, to 2 NEC’s simultaneously from 2 dvd-roms (at 12x or 4x for that matter), how many times have you done this exactly ?

From your response, it is clear… not many.
Because if you had, you would know there is a definite problem with the slave drive, no matter which end of the damn wire it’s attached to…

… but I am also just telling you the difference between theory and practice. All my drives that are set as master are on the first (interior) connector of an 80 wire IDE cable. And all the slaves, on the end connector.

This is not the difference between theory and practice, but an unrecommended non-standard configuration you might get away with if both connectors are terminated. Try disconnecting a slave drive from the end connector and see how well the master drive performs on the interior connector by itself. At high transfer rates, you are almost guaranteed to have a problem. You are not disproving an “old wives tale”, but violating the intent of the ATA standards to prevent users from having connection problems.

hellbitch:

… As for burning, on the fly, to 2 NEC’s simultaneously from 2 dvd-roms (at 12x or 4x for that matter), how many times have you done this exactly ? From your response, it is clear… not many.

Wow! What a zinger. I have three NEC DVD burners. Should I start some dual burning on the fly to placate you? Sorry, but I’m not going to waste my time. However, since you seem to be impugning my dual burning experience I will give you some history. Doing a quick search for “dual burning” in which I participated brought up 12 threads starting in March of 2002. These threads can be found at Dual Burning Topics. I was helping people in most of the threads but I also describe the different configurations and experiments I used with my own setup.

hellbitch:

…Because if you had, you would know there is a definite problem with the slave drive, no matter which end of the damn wire it’s attached to…

What does “blowing smoke” mean anyway ? Is that a computer terminology ?

No, it’s just a colloquialism for an specious argument.

hellbitch:

Me, being such a daft girl… maybe you can provide me with a link so I can look it up.

I should have realized you were a girl from your handle, and been more gentlemanly. Now that I know that you are a girl, I can admire your daring in experimenting with different configurations. I know that you are not daft, and I now pledge to lighten up my critique. I am not trying to sound condescending, but I think we’ve already beaten this to death.

This is not the difference between theory and practice, but an unrecommended non-standard configuration you might get away with if both connectors are terminated. Try disconnecting a slave drive from the end connector and see how well the master drive performs on the interior connector by itself. At high transfer rates, you are almost guaranteed to have a problem. You are not disproving an “old wives tale”, but violating the intent of the ATA standards to prevent users from having connection problems.

Wow! What a zinger. I have three NEC DVD burners. Should I start some dual burning on the fly to placate you? Sorry, but I’m not going to waste my time. However, since you seem to be impugning my dual burning experience I will give you some history. Doing a quick search for “dual burning” in which I participated brought up 12 threads starting in March of 2002. These threads can be found at Dual Burning Topics. I was helping people in most of the threads but I also describe the different configurations and experiments I used with my own setup.

I don’t have any problems, NOW.

If you would of cared to read my first post in this thread, you would have noticed both my burners are set to MASTER. Which works beautifully.

But in past configurations, I have had the 2 burners on the same IDE, one as master and one as Slave and have experienced many problems.

But since you are such an expert, perhaps you would care to share your knowledge on how to set it as slave and avoid the issues I have mentioned.

there are absolutely no performance differences between setting a drive as master or slave. there ARE performance differences between whether or not two drives share the same IDE channel while both drives are in use, but this has nothing to do with burn quality nor the master/slave relationship.